In Claremont, environmental study delay leads to builder’s remedy 

In the eastern L.A. County city of Claremont, a proposal by Trumark Homes to build 56 single-family homes has stalled for years as the city languished on its environmental review.   

So last month the developer filed another, “supplemental” application as a kind of hedge — a builder’s remedy project that could move along quicker.  

“Time is your biggest enemy,” said Eric Nelson, Trumark’s vice president of community development. “And predictability is probably your second biggest issue. … [Builder’s remedy] was finally the only clear path that we were able to establish at this point.” 

Trumark’s residential project would go up on the site of a long vacant middle school located north of downtown Claremont, near the foothills of the Angeles National Forest. In 2019 the developer entered into an escrow deal to purchase the 10-acre site from the Claremont Board of Education for $13 million, according to city information, and the next year submitted an initial application to the city for a 65-home development with nine Accessory Dwelling Units, “granny flats” or ADUs.  

But the project — including a proposal by the developer to annex 1.25 acres from a neighboring sports park in exchange for building new facilities — proved contentious, inspiring passionate Zoom meetings and a neighborhood opposition group called Keep La Puerta Public.  

In 2021, after more community discussions, Trumark submitted a revised proposal that instead called for 56 homes. “The proposal represents a compromise,” Nelson wrote in a letter to city officials, “following more than two years of discussions with our neighbors and other local stakeholders regarding the property’s future.” 

Goal: Build homes

But so far, city staff have not completed the project’s environmental assessment, which is necessary before the Planning Department and City Council can vote to approve or deny the project. 

Trumark’s builder’s remedy application, which it filed last month, calls for 87 total homes instead of 56, with 69 single-family homes and six triplexes. Eighteen of the units would be dedicated as affordable, in line with builder’s remedy requirements. 

Among builder’s remedy applications, the proposal is somewhat unusual. The legal provision, which has been on California’s books since 1990 but found new prominence beginning last fall, allows developers to bypass local zoning in cities that are failing to meet their state mandated housing planning, and to date developers have typically used it to file for multifamily projects, including large projects that far exceed local zoning.  

Trumark is not interested in building a large multifamily — the firm would actually prefer to build its 56-home project, Nelson said, and filed its builder’s remedy application as a kind of second option if that project continues to stall. The legal provision also mandates an expedited processing timeline, although projects are still subject to CEQA review.

“I believe in the [local approvals] process and don’t necessarily think that builder’s remedy is the best way to go,” Nelson said. 

But after encountering delays for so long by what should be relatively routine environmental assessments, the firm felt it had to pursue another option.

“We just want to build homes,” Nelson explained. “Our goal is, ‘How do we get homes built here?’”

Claremont, a suburban, upper middle-income city about 30 miles east of Downtown L.A., has a population of around 36,000 and, according to state requirements, has to plan for an additional 1,700 housing units through 2029. Along with most of Southern California, the city faced an October 2021 deadline to reach state compliance on its housing plan, but has not yet received the state signoff, leaving it susceptible to builder’s remedy and other penalties. The city recently filed another version of its plan to the state that is currently in review, according to a state tracker. 

“The city is currently reviewing Trumark’s preliminary application to assess whether it includes all of the information required by state law,” officials said in a statement after the builder’s remedy proposal came in. The statement added that the city expected to have another update within weeks. 

The application has added a new wrinkle to Claremont’s delinquent planning process. Last fall, Californians for Homeownership, a nonprofit pro-housing group sponsored by the California Association of Realtors, also filed a lawsuit — one of many the group has filed to combat housing-adverse cities — against the city over its failure to produce the updated Housing Element. 

That suit has now been settled, with the settlement deal implementing a July 31 deadline for state compliance on the city’s new Housing Element, the Claremont Courier reported.  

Read more

Los Angeles

LA developer files a builder’s remedy application in Santa Barbara

Los Angeles

La Cañada Flintridge doubles down on builder’s remedy fight   

Los Angeles

Bye builder’s remedy: Santa Monica approves settlement with WSC